The New Norm: A Report by Peter Piven, FAIA
The results of a survey of firm principals across the U.S. about the differences they envision in technology/working remotely, in markets and marketing, in work life and culture, and in society in our post-pandemic future.

May 6, 2020

Introduction

My sequestering began on
March 13, 2020, the day that the World Health Organization described the
coronavirus manifestation Covid-19 as a pandemic. I have had a home office for
some time, but circumstances changed for me and, I quickly realized, for all of
you.

Staying in touch with
colleagues and clients is a vital part of my practice. Knowing more and in more
detail about the design professionals I serve is important for me: what you are
experiencing, how you are adapting, what technology you are using and, most
important, what you believe will be different about the profession in the
future – a new norm. On April 1, I conducted the first of 34 interviews with
principals of firms in Boston, Chicago, Fort Worth, Los Angeles, St. Louis, New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Washington, DC. What follows is a
compilation and evaluation of responses that I hope will be helpful, even
useful, to you as we look at how the pandemic may change our profession in the
future.

Context

A few weeks into
sequestering, 21 respondents (60%) said they were the same size as they were
when they started. Ten respondents (30%) said they were smaller, having
furloughed or laid off a few people. Only three respondents (10%) indicated
they had increased staff. The size of the firms I interviewed ranged from 4
people to 300, with a mean of 61 and a median of 32.

Diminishing work/workload
issues included projects that suffered slowdowns, projects that had funding
cutbacks and were stopped, state regulations that prohibited construction
except for projects deemed essential, difficulty in scheduling public meetings,
difficulty in getting required approvals, failed bond referenda, projects that
prohibited entry into buildings to maintain health safety of the occupants, and
political chicanery. None were due to firms’ inability to serve clients for any
reason.

Work/workload increases were
experienced by firms with projects in particular markets, especially
manufacturing, warehousing, some healthcare projects, and schools with opening
deadlines.

The most important
adaptation, universally cited, was the change from working in-office to working
remotely for almost everything: meetings with partners, staff, project teams,
clients, contractors, and prospective clients, but also drawing reviews and
social events.

Of 18 programs mentioned,
Zoom and Teams were brought up most frequently, but many firms used several,
including some that are relatively new in the marketplace. [See Appendix]

What do you believe will
be different in design and construction once a new norm is reached?

The quantity and quality of
the responses to this question made it clear that the respondents were thinking
about different futures. What follows are descriptions of the differences
envisioned in technology/working remotely, in markets and marketing, in work
life and culture, and in our society.

Differences in
technology/working remotely

Before the pandemic, some
design professionals reluctantly allowed employees to work remotely for special
circumstances, such as a remote home location, personal illness, and child care
needs. The reluctance stemmed from technical insufficiencies, fear of
malingering, imagined (or actual) lack of control, and in some firms, an
underlying belief that working remotely was counter-cultural, meaning “that’s
not how we work around here” or “close face-to-face collaboration is an
important part of our design process.”

The most significant change
resulting from the pandemic appears to be the development, acceptance, and widespread
use of new technologies, especially those that permit working remotely. There
was almost no other reasonable choice once sequestering was required or
recommended. Principals quickly learned that the technology works and works well,
easily, facilitating virtual conversations, collaborations, and meetings of all
kinds. Not only does working remotely work, it works better for some things and
for some people. Trusted employees remain trustworthy. Efficiency and
effectiveness continue. That said, some principals still look forward to a
return to practices in which face-to-face conversations are an integral part of
their design process.

Individual responses
regarding future differences in facilities are listed in the Appendix.

Differences in
facilities

The advances in technology
and the newly-found practice of working remotely have led to a realization that
space and the way space is used will be different, not only for the design
professions themselves, but also for related professions, commercial enterprises,
and institutions. An initial forecast and determination of the proportion
between in-house and remote workers may reveal that decisions will need to be
made regarding the amount and kind of space that will be required as practices
move ahead. Such decisions will likely include consideration of hoteling and
benching, along with a more traditional office. The notion of appropriate
personal space will also enter the equation, even after Covid-19 is vanquished
and societal health returns.

Will hospitals, other
healthcare organizations, and the physicians themselves require the same amount
and kind of space when telemedicine becomes a fixture in medical practice? One
of the five cases described by Michael Crichton’s Five Patients, first
published 50 years ago, described a case in which a patient’s medical issue was
diagnosed and treated remotely. Now it is becoming more common and will likely
affect the amount and kind of spaces that are developed for the practice of
medicine – in hospitals, medical offices, and walk-in urgent care centers.

What about lawyers,
accountants, insurance agents, bankers, and others who have worked remotely
themselves or with others who have? It is reasonable to assume that they will
not need the same amount or kind of space to which they have become accustomed.
And what about the furniture, utilities, and systems that fill and serve those
spaces? They will change, as well. What will grow, what will shrink., and what
will neither grow nor shrink – but will change?

Individual responses
regarding differences in facilities are listed in the Appendix.

Differences in markets
and marketing

The advantages of working
remotely have resulted in anticipation of differences in the markets
themselves, and the way that marketing will be different. Even if overall
market volume remains stable, the need for different sizes, configurations, and
fit-outs of facilities will trigger demand for new and renovated healthcare,
office, and institutional facilities, especially schools. Firms that have
focused on markets where growth is less likely may need to re-focus on other
markets.

The way architects and other
design professionals market and sell will also change. Diminished interest in
travel by both professionals and their clients, and the ability to connect
remotely, will change the marketing paradigm. Although developing and
maintaining relationships will remain an essential aspect of marketing, more
will be done long-distance. Personal charisma will remain an essential
ingredient for some, but it may be manifested differently. As remote
connections become the norm, there will likely be more cross-boundary
affiliations for both doing and getting work.

Individual responses
regarding differences in markets and marketing are listed in the Appendix.

Differences in work
life and culture

There is little question
that the daily lives within the firm will change, in some cases drastically,
depending on the percentage of the work that is done by those working in the
office and those working remotely. One beneficial result of working remotely is
learning that work can be done and done well. Project efficiency and
effectiveness are maintained. Collaborations, conferences, and other regular
communications are achieved. Despite this, it isn’t the same as face-to-face
relationships. The human connection in our lives is important; some who work
remotely feel that difference more strongly than others.

The work-life balance is
likely to shift, especially for those working remotely, and the shift may not
be positive. It may take more time, usually later in the day, to complete one’s
work due to personal distractions during the day.

For some, personal
collaboration and spontaneity are important, particularly in front-end
conceptual design discussions. Without careful monitoring and maintenance of
operational protocols, they could easily erode.

Individual responses
regarding differences in work life and culture are listed in the Appendix

Differences in the
society

Although future differences
cited by the respondents sometimes focused on their own offices or their
professions, others related to the larger society in which we live and work. Some
responses expressed a cynical view of the future: “The economy will be down”
and its corollary: “There will be less money around,” but also “Five years from
now this will all be a memory … societies have short memories.” Most responses
were distinctly positive, e.g., “Sustainability will become a large part of
architecture” and “The next big issue will be treated as more life-sustaining.”

Individual responses
regarding differences in our society are listed in the Appendix.

The principals with whom I
spoke adapted quickly and maintained their practices. They have mastered new
technologies and adjusted to the new paradigm of working remotely. They
understand that things are still changing and that the future is still unknown.
The profession and its practitioners are more flexible than one might have
imagined. That is a very positive sign for the future, whatever it may be.

APPENDIX

How did you adapt to the
work/workload issues?

• Staff
reduction via furlough or layoff

• Time
reductions, usually but not always combined with salary reductions

• Zoom: cloud platform for video and audio
conferencing, chat and webinars; the current market leader

Responses regarding
future differences in technology/working remotely

•
Working remotely will continue … at some level

• Because
of remote work, there will be changes in the way the workday is used: more
short meetings, communication with consultants

• Greater
acceptance of on-line conferencing, etc. People will accept that conference
calls can take the place of face-to-face meetings

• Remote
communication with (engineering) consultants

• Thought
management procedures and protocols developed

• Clients
will feel they can save time by working remotely

• Less
project-related travel

• Construction
site video communications

• Employees
working in consultants’ offices

• More
readily hiring young people with families needing to work at home

• Possibly
long-distance employees in other cities

• A
real impact on reimbursable expense dollars

• Accelerated
collaboration

• A
reduction in discretionary spending; big companies will support major charities

•
Low-end work drifts to higher-price people; no more secretaries – less than
today

• Possibly
more cross-boundary mergers

• More
acceptance of digitized signatures

• There
will be a remote norm for social distance only if encouraged by government; I
don’t think it’s as good or profitable for people to work remotely

Responses regarding
future differences in facilities

• Less
or different space needed for ourselves and clients, e.g., multi-use classrooms

• Smaller
work space; it will be harder to decide in favor of larger, more comfortable
space in the future

• May
affect offices (space) the way they were affected
before

• Mid-size
practices will allow more flexibility to work from home, reduce space needs

• Offices
shrink.

• Apartments
get bigger

• Less
retail and entertainment

• Space,
a major consideration, possibility of being less facility-dependent, like the
“hoteling” concept, which is also visible in healthcare – telemedicine

• Companies
may reduce their leased space because they have learned that their people can
be as effective at home

• Developers
and users of office space may reverse the trend of the last 20 years, which shrank
square feet/person to 6’x4’ per cubicle, and start making larger work spaces to
create more distance between workers

• More
prefabrication; it’s been coming

• Hard
office space less in demand

• There
will also be an effect on the office market for financial and legal communities

• Covid19
advanced our process of assessing our desire for growth, doing projects where
teams weren’t working in the same space – the need to blur the lines, improve
communication, decide on tools, and how to manage client communications and
distance

• We
are still getting RFP’s and still getting Pharma work. Other things (higher ed,
cultural/museums, workplace) have slowed down.

• Less
office space, which will be a big difference for us

• More
unisex bathrooms, front doors more automatic, metal handrails

• Decrease
in rental space, renegotiation of leases; understood change from “need more
space” to “touchdown spaces” rather than permanent

• Higher
ed facilities now working remotely may question spending on travel and may
impact physical plants

• In
healthcare, people figured out telemedicine, a savior for primary care
physicians; that structure will be here to stay (and will affect) how much
office space is needed

•
Acute care: every bedroom will adapt to critical care needs; emergency rooms
will be prepared for the next crisis

Responses regarding
future differences in markets and marketing

• Ability
to seek more distant work

• Healthcare
systems will embrace telemedicine, and will learn how to respond to mitigate
current risks

• Business
model for schools and higher ed will change; there is a rebellion by MBA
students who want credit for distance learning, while the university incurs
expenses to buy equipment and train teachers; most will not be able to charge
the same, and will need larger population limits and operational protocols and
standards

• Some
markets won’t be as vibrant, e.g., independent schools and universities;
applications are down in Pennsylvania state schools, therefore we need to
expand our markets. Less retail and entertainment